Of course, the argument is likely becoming a stage for national debate. Cambodian people from all walks of life must participate with this renaissance and enlightening crusade for the nation. While one side is sticking on the rational of National Constitution and having the King on the Constitutional Mandate, the other side is focusing on the rationale of people’s will and their conscience.
This question is really relevant that “Can the spoken represent the unspoken?”. I cannot calculate how many are spoken and how many are unspoken. Recently, Prince Dhammiko declared to the peaceful mass demonstrators at the Freedom Park that there were thieving of victory from the CNRP by the CPP. He elaborated that the unnecessary dispatching/rallying of arm force, tanks and guns to every part of capital city, to the headquarter of NEC and CCC etc. during the pending election result, is a fact of threatening.
I have two scenarios to back up my argument following:
1. To pursue my neutral debate (professional neutrality as said probably), I see the existing mechanism of Constitution is facing dilemma as no international communities have given green light to the election result. And I think the UNs is the most outspoken one in this matter as their recommendations to reform the NEC prior to the Election has been intentionally neglected. So extending to this backing up, is there any factor or correlation between Cambodian Constitution and UNs as well as other international obligations to adjudicate or legitimize this bonding or undetachable obligation?
2. Civil rights and liberty have evidenced as all were opposing to the existing laws or constitution. If I can recall back to the March of Ghandi for freedom from England, or Jr.King to fight for the halting of black skin discrimination; all are opposing the existing mechanism, am I right? This doesn’t include many dictatorial countries that their existing laws and constitution are just the shield to protect absolute power. But when people woke up, those laws have been seen nonsense.
But I do think laws and constitution in Cambodia have been amended by National Assembly and it has been seen flaws while Check and Balance, and Effective Implementation, have been nationally and internationally criticized. So if we could not take those critics as our bonanza for reform in all fields, just NEC reform is nothing hideous to the Constitution at all. The NEC reform will only be luminous to this nation, unity and the strengthening of nation building through Election Confidence and Trust.
Note that I have only supported the effort, in case of Cambodia especially at the present crossroad, to switch from the use of guns to use the power of pens. At an effort of CNRP’s leadership, the testimony of peaceful mass demonstration, the constraints behavior of the policemen, the change to more open minded TV commentators, the well-informed demonstrators/population, the maturity of the politicians, tolerance and nonviolence culture, all can keep the flame alive on this wonder land.
The puzzling question here now is why NEC has been seen so protective, not only by the powerful entities and some politicians, by the use of Constitution to protect NEC is not plausible, healthy and futuristic at all for Cambodia.